https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111672 The Tribunal upheld the duty demanded from the appellant, a Texturised Synthetic Yarn manufacturer, for alleged clandestine removal of goods due to a significant discrepancy between excise records and the balance sheet. Despite lack of direct evidence, the appellant's failure to explain or participate in hearings led to the rejection of their appeal. The Tribunal emphasized that silence was detrimental to the defense, shifting the burden of proof onto the appellant. The judgment highlights the importance of active participation and providing explanations to counter allegations of clandestine activities, underscoring the consequences of remaining silent in legal proceedings. en-us Mon, 29 Mar 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 24 Apr 2012 16:30:45 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111672 The Tribunal upheld the duty demanded from the appellant, a Texturised Synthetic Yarn manufacturer, for alleged clandestine removal of goods due to a significant discrepancy between excise records and the balance sheet. Despite lack of direct evidence, the appellant's failure to explain or participate in hearings led to the rejection of their appeal. The Tribunal emphasized that silence was detrimental to the defense, shifting the burden of proof onto the appellant. The judgment highlights the importance of active participation and providing explanations to counter allegations of clandestine activities, underscoring the consequences of remaining silent in legal proceedings. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 29 Mar 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111672